Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

Schools closed until February? (part 3)

1…8384868889…323

Comments

  • #2552
    8k71ps
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 105 ✭✭8k71ps


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Not at all, makes perfect sense when you think about it. Second-level students are better able to follow protocols and avoid spreading the disease, even if they are more likely to be infectious.

    Four year olds are more like the ASTI - they don’t understand what needs to be done.

    On a serious note, great news that the positivity rate is one-third that in the community, it shows that schools are not contributing to the spread of COVID in any meaningful way, and therefore should remain open.

    Thanks Norma, I didn't consider that one


  • #2553
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    meeeeh wrote: »
    If we follow the positivity rate in a the general testing which is currently just under 6% you are looking at 2 out of 30.

    However since positivity rate is less than 3% in schools that means there is good chance only three quarters of one child would be positive. Testing 30 out of 30 would also mean those who are less of a close contact and less likely to be infected would be tested then I suspect positivity rate would be even less for schools. So maybe one half of child would test positive.

    This is fun. In any case the more you test less the positivity rate would be (if we take it that the reproduction no. is 1).

    I love how you quote what the rate in schools are like it's a fact from trusted, uncontested, unproblematic data.

    Or the more you test, the more cases you find- like we saw happen when the teacher insisted to the HSE that the class needed to be tested as close contacts against the HSE's resistance but when they relented- found 7 more cases.

    blanch152 wrote: »
    Not at all, makes perfect sense when you think about it. Second-level students are better able to follow protocols and avoid spreading the disease, even if they are more likely to be infectious.

    Four year olds are more like the ASTI - they don’t understand what needs to be done.

    On a serious note, great news that the positivity rate is one-third that in the community, it shows that schools are not contributing to the spread of COVID in any meaningful way, and therefore should remain open.

    I don't think that's why secondary students are let home first. Because we know, and I know that you know, children aged 10 and older are just as capable of contracting and spreading covid. Other studies have shown younger children have as much and even more of the virus found in their samples than adults. I have read many articles now at this stage in which the experts say that we need more studies have have put doubts on earlier studies concluding children aren't big contributors to spread. This is because they are more likely to be asymptomatic and so were very often never tested or suspected of being the source.

    I think secondary students are let home because they don't need minders and can better handle remote learning by themselves.

    I posted a personal story regarding children and testing earlier in the thread about my cousin and his family having it. The young kids even had symptoms first but it was dismissed as colds and they were never tested.


  • #2554
    wirelessdude01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,465 ✭✭✭wirelessdude01


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Not at all, makes perfect sense when you think about it. Second-level students are better able to follow protocols and avoid spreading the disease, even if they are more likely to be infectious.

    Four year olds are more like the ASTI - they don’t understand what needs to be done.

    On a serious note, great news that the positivity rate is one-third that in the community, it shows that schools are not contributing to the spread of COVID in any meaningful way, and therefore should remain open.

    Great to see someone who hasn't a clue making themselves the authority on everything.


  • #2555
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    irishblessing wrote: »
    I love how you quote what the rate in schools are like it's a fact from trusted, uncontested, unproblematic data.

    Or the more you test, the more cases you find- like we saw happen when the teacher insisted to the HSE that the class needed to be tested as close contacts against the HSE's resistance but when they relented- found 7 more cases.

    Nonsense like this is why we need teachers and not parents to teach maths. It's pretty obvious that more people you test the more cases you find but that still means that positivity rate will go down if the rate of infection in society is staying the same. Positivity rate is very simple concept yet it completely baffles some.

    And btw positivity rate is a fact. It doesn't tell you the percentage of kids in school infected (it would be most likely lower percentage) it just tells you how many of the tests performed are coming back positive. That's a fact, it does estimate anything it just tells you how many among performed tests return positive for Corona.


  • #2556
    wirelessdude01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,465 ✭✭✭wirelessdude01


    8k71ps wrote: »
    Yes they were [url] https://www.ucd.ie/newsandopinion/news/2020/april/10/hsedoublescovid-19testingcapacitythroughucdnvrlto10000followinggmiagreement/ [/url]

    Well they definitely aren't now. It was Cillian De Gascun himself who said they only do about 600 now.


  • Advertisement
  • #2557
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Nonsense like this is why we need teachers and not parents to teach maths. It's pretty obvious that more people you test the more cases you find but that still means that positivity rate will go down if the rate of infection in society is staying the same. Positivity rate is very simple concept yet it completely baffles some.

    Where did I demonstrate a lack of ability to do maths?

    You are just getting your personal attacks in as per usual. Which is usually the first sign of someone not having anything else to fall back on.

    The current positivity rate comes from a woeful lack of testing and tracing and from a problematic system that finally broke down and was unable to cope.


  • #2558
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    8k71ps wrote: »
    Yes they were [url] https://www.ucd.ie/newsandopinion/news/2020/april/10/hsedoublescovid-19testingcapacitythroughucdnvrlto10000followinggmiagreement/ [/url]

    In fairness that article only refers to what they would be capable of doing, not the confirmed number of tests they completed. Unless I missed it...


  • #2559
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Where did I demonstrate a lack of ability to do maths?

    You are just getting your personal attacks in as per usual. Which is usually the first sign of someone not having anything else to fall back on.

    The current positivity rate comes from a woeful lack of testing and tracing and from a problematic system that finally broke down and was unable to cope.

    I amended my previous post but I will repeat myself again:
    positivity rate = number of positive tests returned/number of total tests.

    If you test everyone in the country the positivity rate will be low, if you test only those who display severe symptoms the positivity rate will be high. However in absolute numbers you will find more Corona cases if you test the whole population than just those who display symptoms.


  • #2560
    wirelessdude01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,465 ✭✭✭wirelessdude01


    As it stands the official stats from NPHET makes it sound like we work in a of extreme healthiness. Those of us on the ground suspect, think and know otherwise.

    Principals don't generally tend to give in to hyperbole much but when you have some willing to go on the news to call out Michael Martin over his BS talking then people really need to start listening.

    These clips are freely available on the various virgin media news platforms.


  • #2561
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I amended my previous post but I will repeat myself again:
    positivity rate = number of positive tests returned/number of total tests.

    If you test everyone in the country yhe positivity rate will be low, of you test only those who display severe symptoms the positivity rate will be high. However in absolute numbers you will find more Corona cases if you test the whole population than just those who display symptoms.

    Yeah, you edited your post after I quoted you and posted it. Unless you're correcting an error you should just post another reply to me at that stage.

    Anyway, you first stated the positivity rate in school as fact like it's not sourced from a problematic system and in particular when dealing with the schools. It's now been revealed to the public that it failed. Data is contested by another source compiling verified data on schools, and in light of a completely disingenuous claim and play on semantics that the HSE have done "mass testing." Please.

    I think if you test everyone in the schools more comprehensively, if the definition of close contact wasn't deliberately played with in order to not test as many students/pods/classes and have more teachers quarantined (which they obviously want to avoid with the shortage), then you would find many more positive, especially asymptomatic cases. Which would increase the positivity rate. If the total numbers of tests done in the education sector are far lower than they should be, the positivity rate would be lower and painting a false picture. Or am I missing something here.


  • Advertisement
  • #2562
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    I think it's probable that positivity rate in some schools is much higher than in others but it doesn't change what national average is for schools.


  • #2563
    HerrKuehn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Anyway, you first stated the positivity rate in school as fact like it's not sourced from a problematic system and in particular when dealing with the schools. It's now been revealed to the public that it failed. Data is contested by another source compiling verified data on schools, and in light of a completely disingenuous claim and play on semantics that the HSE have done "mass testing." Please.

    Out of interest, what is this other source of data?


  • #2564
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Or am I missing something here.

    You are. Maybe someone else can explain what positivity rate actually is because I can't explain anymore clearly. (I guess that makes me a bad teacher and another argument to keep kids in schools).


  • #2565
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    HerrKuehn wrote: »
    Out of interest, what is this other source of data?

    The verified and collated data published by the people who run the "Alerting parents of outbreaks in schools Ireland." fb page. It's been quoted in the media now and government have been asked to explain the discrepancy, the last time I read an article on it the journalist said there had been no response.


  • #2566
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    meeeeh wrote: »
    You are. Maybe someone else can explain what positivity rate actually is because I can't explain anymore clearly. (I guess that makes me a bad teacher and another argument to keep kids in schools).

    You said it should be left to teachers, not parents to do maths. So out maths me then.

    Do break this statement you made down for me so, and how a lack of cohesive definitions of close contacts, a lack of proper testing & tracing, and a collapsed system doesn't effect average positivity rate in schools:
    I think it's probable that positivity rate in some schools is much higher than in others but it doesn't change what national average is for schools.


  • #2567
    wirelessdude01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,465 ✭✭✭wirelessdude01


    irishblessing wrote: »
    The verified and collated data published by the people who run the "Alerting parents of outbreaks in schools Ireland." fb page. It's been quoted in the media now and government have been asked to explain the discrepancy, the last time I read an article on it the journalist said there had been no response.

    I've seen both Virgin Media and RTE use data from it.

    Fergal Bowers pretty much intimated on one broadcast that he believed their data moreso than the official figures.


  • #2568
    HerrKuehn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    irishblessing wrote: »
    The verified and collated data published by the people who run the "Alerting parents of outbreaks in schools Ireland." fb page. It's been quoted in the media now and government have been asked to explain the discrepancy, the last time I read an article on it the journalist said there had been no response.

    So its data from a facebook page. Who verifies it?


  • #2569
    8k71ps
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 105 ✭✭8k71ps


    wirelessdude01 wrote: »
    Well they definitely aren't now. It was Cillian De Gascun himself who said they only do about 600 now.

    I believe that's not telling the full story, as far as I'm aware it's much higher but unfortunately I can't give a source since it's somebody I know. 10,000 to 600 is extremely unlikely, I'd say he could be referring to the total average since it was barely operational for covid over the summer.


  • #2570
    8k71ps
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 105 ✭✭8k71ps


    HerrKuehn wrote: »
    So its data from a facebook page. Who verifies it?

    The staff of the page. They do require actual proof though, there are hundreds of cases they reject due to a lack of evidence. I would certainly say by how it's reported there are many many more reported cases than the page reports rather than the other way around.

    Also if they were just adding the cases willy nilly the government would have certainly said so to remove attention from it. So far all their stats have done to my knowledge is to add to the confusion, especially since every single education system in all of western Europe and most of the world are reporting cases much higher than ours alongside most international studies.


  • #2571
    Blondini
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭Blondini


    HerrKuehn wrote: »
    So its data from a facebook page. Who verifies it?

    Biggest public conspiracy ever.

    Over 116,000 lizard people got together and forged nearly 600 letters.

    Better call Jim Corr!


  • Advertisement
  • #2572
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    irishblessing wrote: »
    You said it should be left to teachers, not parents to do maths. So out maths me then.

    Do break this statement you made down for me so, and how a lack of cohesive definitions of close contacts, a lack of proper testing & tracing, and a collapsed system doesn't effect average positivity rate in schools:

    Please please please read this first before you continue to post about positivity rate:

    https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/covid-19-testing-understanding-the-percent-positive.html


  • #2573
    khalessi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,218 ✭✭✭khalessi


    HerrKuehn wrote: »
    So its data from a facebook page. Who verifies it?

    It is not a question of who but how.

    The how is verified letters or texts from HSE and verified texts or letters from the schools to the parents. So far I am aware of a number of schools whch have had cases but have not been mentioned.

    So I reckon the number on FB is under the actual number of schools with cases.


  • #2574
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    8k71ps wrote: »
    The staff of the page. They do require actual proof though, there are hundreds of cases they reject due to a lack of evidence. I would certainly say by how it's reported there are many many more reported cases than the page reports rather than the other way around.

    Also if they were just adding the cases willy nilly the government would have certainly said so to remove attention from it. So far all their stats have done to my knowledge is to add to the confusion, especially since every single education system in all of western Europe and most of the world are reporting cases much higher than ours alongside most international studies.

    Are they counting all the negative tests returned among school children?


  • #2575
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    HerrKuehn wrote: »
    So its data from a facebook page. Who verifies it?

    I can pick up on your dismissiveness in saying "data from a fb page." You do know NASA, National Geographic, Uni's, WHO, CDC etc etc have social media pages and publish their data links on them?

    Anyway, I already told you verifies it:
    "published by the people who run the "Alerting parents of outbreaks in schools Ireland." fb page."

    Parents, teachers, principals all contribute to that page. Letters and electronic messages sent by the HSE and/or the school are published by the admins. No one else is allowed to make posts. Many of the alerts have a couple different sources (HSE letter and school text alert for example) and most have comments from parents discussing the messages they received. I haven't seen any comments saying that never happened in their school and it's a fake. I honestly can't believe some government mole, MelbourneMan is a prime candidate, hasn't set about sending in a faked notice to undermine their efforts. I'm probably giving him ideas! :pac:

    HSE knew they were on to them because the letters sent started to drastically reduce and were making more calls. Letters sent by some principals said not to put up on social media as per HSE instructions but obviously some people sent them anyway. Imagine how many more cases are not even published or public knowledge.


  • #2576
    wirelessdude01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,465 ✭✭✭wirelessdude01


    8k71ps wrote: »
    I believe that's not telling the full story, as far as I'm aware it's much higher but unfortunately I can't give a source since it's somebody I know. 10,000 to 600 is extremely unlikely, I'd say he could be referring to the total average since it was barely operational for covid over the summer.

    https://www.newstalk.com/news/national-lab-unable-process-coronavirus-tests-next-two-weekends-1095313


  • #2577
    khalessi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,218 ✭✭✭khalessi


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Are they counting all the negative tests returned among school children?

    They are counting the actual positive cases which are much more than the actual number of positive cases released by HSE.


  • #2578
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    khalessi wrote: »
    It is not a question of who but how.

    The how is verified letters or texts from HSE and verified texts or letters from the schools to the parents. So far I am aware of a number of schools whch have had cases but have not been mentioned.

    So I reckon the number on FB is under the actual number of schools with cases.

    Again what has that to do with positivity rate?


  • #2579
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Please please please read this first before you continue to post about positivity rate:

    https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/covid-19-testing-understanding-the-percent-positive.html

    meeeh, I understand how it's calculated. Stop trying to turn it into a misunderstanding of maths which it isn't and actually answer my questions which calls into question the validity of the data used in the maths. You're always so disingenuous in effort to be right at any cost it's ridiculous.


  • #2580
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    irishblessing wrote: »
    meeeh, I understand how it's calculated. Stop trying to turn it into a misunderstanding of maths which it isn't and actually answer my questions which calls into question the validity of the data used in the maths. You're always so disingenuous in effort to be right at any cost it's ridiculous.

    What data? The test is either positive or it's not. Are you saying they are recording positive tests as negative?


  • Advertisement
  • #2581
    8k71ps
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 105 ✭✭8k71ps


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Please please please read this first before you continue to post about positivity rate:

    https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/covid-19-testing-understanding-the-percent-positive.html

    All of the things they listed could lead to both decreases case numbers and increased positivity via lop-sided and parochial application of testing. It's not just a question of "the more tested the less the positivity rate". If you listen to any experience on the ground you'd know that the stats are effectively duds and we have to look to other countries to see if it transmits in schools higher than the general population (hint: it does)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement